Re: [aerogear-dev] WebSocket and AeroGear ?

This is similar to what I was thinking as well. There are two main types of push; native & non-native, but I don't like those designations. It is really more like "live" & "background" push, referring to the state of the client. Live push == Application is open, and active on the client. Push msgs are routed to the application via more traditional long/short polling, websockets, etc... Background push == Application is closed, and not active on the client. Regular live push messages are not possible. The only way to communicate is via APN, GC native messaging (sorry web apps - no love). In an ideal world there would be no difference to the application developer using AeroGear API's (client or server). The server-side would know what clients are available, and the clients would be listening automatically. Sending a message would be agnostic for the server-side. Unfortunately this can not "fully" be the case as background/native messages have limitations on the content, client support, and delivery mechanisms.

So I think the best we can do is setup a "smart" message system that gets you pretty close with good fallback api's and checks for what sort of messages are possible, or configured. Make sense, or is this just a big ramble? :-) -Jay On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > well, > > the idea is to have a wrapper/hook for "push notification" (e.g. APN) > in the notifier as well: > * receiving 'native push' events, when the app is offline (inactive, > not watching the tab/window) > > If an app is offline, you simple can't receive a websocket frame/msg. > So push is needed to tell AG that is needs to fetch data for sync etc. > > -Matthias > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Burr Sutter <bsutter(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> I am concerned about the words "push" and "notifier" as those can become confused with real "push notifications" which we will have to have a client API for in the future. >> >> >> On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> >>> any further comments? >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> yesterday some folks of the team meet, to talk about WebSocket - more >>>> generally (HTML5) connectivity. >>>> >>>> Here is a write-up from the meeting: >>>> https://gist.github.com/dd6e3c2da08830776996 >>>> >>>> Feedback and comments are welcome - Please use the comment function on >>>> that gist! >>>> >>>> Cheers! >>>> Matthias >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matthias Wessendorf >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf